Debate Sub Board?

[Azqato 503]

NOTE: Please read over all the sides of the arguement before voting. Do not vote yes or no just because your friends want you to. I want everyone's true opinion.

As discussed here, me and NamelessOne666 think that having a debate sub section in Serious Discussions would be useful for the board because people would be able to argue their opinion about various topics, rather than have a discussion. Nameless attempted to make a topic for debates, but it just seems too crowded to have more than one debate within one topic. If the reason behind it is lack of moderators / time, I will gladly moderate the section, and make the rules.

 

 

Listen, we can argue this all day. The way I see it, the easiest thing is to make the board, and have a trial-error sort of thing. I have supplied many reasons, showed how it makes our board look more organized, and shows off the pure maturity of our members that choose to debate the subject. The only reason I have herd from the other side of the debate is that we already have a section that is [somewhat] suitable for debates, and a dead board would look bad for our website. I will personally look out for the board, give it rules, structure, and moderate it thoroughly so it does not die.

 

Make your choice, but please base it off the polls and the many positives it can bring to the Ghoztcraft.

 

That is my final thought on the subject.

[Major Zhuinden 128]

Obvious yes.

 

The Serious Discussion part of the forum has been decaying since Fish stopped nurturing it in the first place, and this would revive it. A Debate subforum in the Serious Discussions, to revive what has been lost, to revive the minds of the people who sticked around in the first place.

[Poply 178]

We really don't need anymore inactive dead boards. If we want a section revived, then we should start posting in it. We don't need to add anything.

[Azqato 503]

We really don't need anymore inactive dead boards. If we want a section revived, then we should start posting in it. We don't need to add anything.

 

Again, it doesn't seem fit to have debates in a section in which one is supposed to be discussing. If worst comes to worst and it becomes highly inactive (not that probable because there are lot of topics to debate), we could just delete the sub board and forget it ever happened.

 

Also, having healthy debates will show off the class that is often forgotten in the flame board. I know it still exists in this website under the masks of people.

[NamelessOne666 55]

We really don't need anymore inactive dead boards. If we want a section revived, then we should start posting in it. We don't need to add anything.

 

Oh yes we do, I want a place where I can ARGUE in a war-like manner, NOT discuss in a 10-year old manner. And if a sub board is created I can get it VERY ACTIVE, I have more then enough things to argue about.

[Poply 178]

We really don't need anymore inactive dead boards. If we want a section revived, then we should start posting in it. We don't need to add anything.

 

Again, it doesn't seem fit to have debates in a section in which one is supposed to be discussing. If worst comes to worst and it becomes highly inactive (not that probable because there are lot of topics to debate), we could just delete the sub board and forget it ever happened.

You're arguing semantics. Feel free to have debates in the serious discussion section like we've been doing all these years.

 

We really don't need anymore inactive dead boards. If we want a section revived, then we should start posting in it. We don't need to add anything.

 

Oh yes we do, I want a place where I can ARGUE in a war-like manner, NOT discuss in a 10-year old manner. And if a sub board is created I can get it VERY ACTIVE, I have more then enough things to argue about.

Whether you want to argue like a 10 year old or very militantly; We still have the flame board.

 

If you wan't to argue like an adult we have the serious discussion section.

[Azqato 503]

We really don't need anymore inactive dead boards. If we want a section revived, then we should start posting in it. We don't need to add anything.

 

Again, it doesn't seem fit to have debates in a section in which one is supposed to be discussing. If worst comes to worst and it becomes highly inactive (not that probable because there are lot of topics to debate), we could just delete the sub board and forget it ever happened.

You're arguing semantics. Feel free to have debates in the serious discussion section like we've been doing all these years.

 

I realize that we have been doing it in Serious Discussion, but it just is not efficient following rules that werent meant for discussions and not debates. Also, what reasons do you have for not having a debate board besides it already being shared with Serious Discussion?

[NamelessOne666 55]

We really don't need anymore inactive dead boards. If we want a section revived, then we should start posting in it. We don't need to add anything.

 

Again, it doesn't seem fit to have debates in a section in which one is supposed to be discussing. If worst comes to worst and it becomes highly inactive (not that probable because there are lot of topics to debate), we could just delete the sub board and forget it ever happened.

You're arguing semantics. Feel free to have debates in the serious discussion section like we've been doing all these years.

 

We really don't need anymore inactive dead boards. If we want a section revived, then we should start posting in it. We don't need to add anything.

 

Oh yes we do, I want a place where I can ARGUE in a war-like manner, NOT discuss in a 10-year old manner. And if a sub board is created I can get it VERY ACTIVE, I have more then enough things to argue about.

Whether you want to argue like a 10 year old or very militantly; We still have the flame board.

 

If you wan't to argue like an adult we have the serious discussion section.

 

You can't really DEBATE in the serious discussion section. A debate is a mix between the Flame Board and The Serious Discussion. There are some topics that you need to get very strong on and use SOME flaming when necessary. And a debate is NOT a discussion. This is why I created that other thread in The Lounge. So people can have actual DEBATES. And all those guidelines that I wrote, I wrote them myself. As I said before I have taken 2 classes on Public Speaking and Debate. I am highly trained in Debating, and I do not feel as the Serious Discussion is the proper to place to hold a debate, thus a sub section should be created.

[Poply 178]

We really don't need anymore inactive dead boards. If we want a section revived, then we should start posting in it. We don't need to add anything.

 

Again, it doesn't seem fit to have debates in a section in which one is supposed to be discussing. If worst comes to worst and it becomes highly inactive (not that probable because there are lot of topics to debate), we could just delete the sub board and forget it ever happened.

You're arguing semantics. Feel free to have debates in the serious discussion section like we've been doing all these years.

 

I realize that we have been doing it in Serious Discussion, but it just is not efficient following rules that werent meant for discussions and not debates. Also, what reasons do you have for not having a debate board besides it already being shared with Serious Discussion?

It makes the site look bad when we have inactive or duplicate sections. If the serious discussion section is dead, there's no reason to turn one inactive section into two. It's just unnecessary.

 

These are the only extra rules for the serious discussion section:

 

Use proper grammar

Post with more than one sentence

Do not flame or insult other members

 

Nothing here would stop some one from having a serious debate.

[NamelessOne666 55]

These are the only extra rules for the serious discussion section:

 

Use proper grammar

Post with more than one sentence

Do not flame or insult other members

 

Nothing here would stop some one from having a serious debate.

 

That would, a REAL debate does not abide by that rule.

[Azqato 503]

You can't really DEBATE in the serious discussion section. A debate is a mix between the Flame Board and The Serious Discussion. There are some topics that you need to get very strong on and use SOME flaming when necessary. And a debate is NOT a discussion. This is why I created that other thread in The Lounge. So people can have actual DEBATES. And all those guidelines that I wrote, I wrote them myself. As I said before I have taken 2 classes on Public Speaking and Debate. I am highly trained in Debating, and I do not feel as the Serious Discussion is the proper to place to hold a debate, thus a sub section should be created.

 

I realize what you mean by using some flaming when necessary. However, not to cause confusion, flaming the other person during a debate is never acceptable, however flaming the idea and providing proof is acceptable.

 

ex.

Bad - You are retarded.

Good - The idea of not having a sub board is retarded because having debates withing Serious Discussion is too condensed.

[Poply 178]

We really don't need anymore inactive dead boards. If we want a section revived, then we should start posting in it. We don't need to add anything.

 

Again, it doesn't seem fit to have debates in a section in which one is supposed to be discussing. If worst comes to worst and it becomes highly inactive (not that probable because there are lot of topics to debate), we could just delete the sub board and forget it ever happened.

You're arguing semantics. Feel free to have debates in the serious discussion section like we've been doing all these years.

 

We really don't need anymore inactive dead boards. If we want a section revived, then we should start posting in it. We don't need to add anything.

 

Oh yes we do, I want a place where I can ARGUE in a war-like manner, NOT discuss in a 10-year old manner. And if a sub board is created I can get it VERY ACTIVE, I have more then enough things to argue about.

Whether you want to argue like a 10 year old or very militantly; We still have the flame board.

 

If you wan't to argue like an adult we have the serious discussion section.

 

You can't really DEBATE in the serious discussion section. A debate is a mix between the Flame Board and The Serious Discussion. There are some topics that you need to get very strong on and use SOME flaming when necessary. And a debate is NOT a discussion. This is why I created that other thread in The Lounge. So people can have actual DEBATES. And all those guidelines that I wrote, I wrote them myself. As I said before I have taken 2 classes on Public Speaking and Debate. I am highly trained in Debating, and I do not feel as the Serious Discussion is the proper to place to hold a debate, thus a sub section should be created.

I can't take you as a serious debater if you're advocating ad hominem attacks and even suggesting that they're necessary.

 

So far the only real point I've heard is so that people can flame in the debate section.

 

These are the only extra rules for the serious discussion section:

 

Use proper grammar

Post with more than one sentence

Do not flame or insult other members

 

Nothing here would stop some one from having a serious debate.

 

That would, a REAL debate does not abide by that rule.

A real debate does. I never saw Obama call McCain a dicknose because he didn't like his health care plan.

[Azqato 503]

We really don't need anymore inactive dead boards. If we want a section revived, then we should start posting in it. We don't need to add anything.

 

Again, it doesn't seem fit to have debates in a section in which one is supposed to be discussing. If worst comes to worst and it becomes highly inactive (not that probable because there are lot of topics to debate), we could just delete the sub board and forget it ever happened.

You're arguing semantics. Feel free to have debates in the serious discussion section like we've been doing all these years.

 

I realize that we have been doing it in Serious Discussion, but it just is not efficient following rules that werent meant for discussions and not debates. Also, what reasons do you have for not having a debate board besides it already being shared with Serious Discussion?

It makes the site look bad when we have inactive or duplicate sections. If the serious discussion section is dead, there's no reason to turn one inactive section into two. It's just unnecessary.

 

These are the only extra rules for the serious discussion section:

 

Use proper grammar

Post with more than one sentence

Do not flame or insult other members

Nothing here would stop some one from having a serious debate.

 

It is not the fact of having too many rules. It is the fact that it is lacking rules. Debates need to have very strict and enforced rules and structure. Also, it is not my main intentions to fully revive Serious Discussions because it isn't really fully inactive. I intend to have a section on the board where we can actually have healthy debates, and show off our website's maturity of members wile still being serious.

 

A real debate does. I never saw Obama call McCain a dicknose because he didn't like his health care plan.

 

Please read what I said above about the flaming.

[Major Zhuinden 128]

I think you should just create the subsection and see trial-and-error-like how it will work out. It doesn't cause much harm, does it? How much work would it take for you?

[Poply 178]

We really don't need anymore inactive dead boards. If we want a section revived, then we should start posting in it. We don't need to add anything.

 

Again, it doesn't seem fit to have debates in a section in which one is supposed to be discussing. If worst comes to worst and it becomes highly inactive (not that probable because there are lot of topics to debate), we could just delete the sub board and forget it ever happened.

You're arguing semantics. Feel free to have debates in the serious discussion section like we've been doing all these years.

 

I realize that we have been doing it in Serious Discussion, but it just is not efficient following rules that werent meant for discussions and not debates. Also, what reasons do you have for not having a debate board besides it already being shared with Serious Discussion?

It makes the site look bad when we have inactive or duplicate sections. If the serious discussion section is dead, there's no reason to turn one inactive section into two. It's just unnecessary.

 

These are the only extra rules for the serious discussion section:

 

Use proper grammar

Post with more than one sentence

Do not flame or insult other members

Nothing here would stop some one from having a serious debate.

 

It is not the fact of having too many rules. It is the fact that it is lacking rules. Debates need to have very strict and enforced rules and formats. Also, it is not my main intentions to split fully revive Serious Discussions. I intend to have a section on the board where we can actually have healthy debates, and show off our website's maturity of members wile still being serious.

But we CAN and HAVE had those exact same type of debates within the serious discussion section.

[NamelessOne666 55]

Ok how about the topic that I opened up in my other thread:

NamelessOne666 is a faggot. How can you debate that topic WITHOUT flaming? It's nearly impossible to do so. And what Rob said

 

I realize what you mean by using some flaming when necessary. However, not to cause confusion, flaming the other person during a debate is never acceptable, however flaming the idea and providing proof you one's flame is acceptable.

 

ex.

Bad - You are retarded.

Good - The idea of not having a sub board is retarded because having debates withing Serious Discussion is too condensed.

[Azqato 503]

I think you should just create the subsection and see trial-and-error-like how it will work out. It doesn't cause much harm, does it? How much work would it take for you?

 

I agree, again from what I said before, whats the worst that can happen?(Highly unlikely) It fails and then we delete it and it never even happened.

[NamelessOne666 55]

I think you should just create the subsection and see trial-and-error-like how it will work out. It doesn't cause much harm, does it? How much work would it take for you?

 

Yeah that too.

[Major Zhuinden 128]

That's not even really a debatable subject in my opinion. That's more like I flame myself, prove it or not. That's just like some pointless flames in the Flame Board, minus all the "fuck".

[Azqato 503]

We really don't need anymore inactive dead boards. If we want a section revived, then we should start posting in it. We don't need to add anything.

 

Again, it doesn't seem fit to have debates in a section in which one is supposed to be discussing. If worst comes to worst and it becomes highly inactive (not that probable because there are lot of topics to debate), we could just delete the sub board and forget it ever happened.

You're arguing semantics. Feel free to have debates in the serious discussion section like we've been doing all these years.

 

I realize that we have been doing it in Serious Discussion, but it just is not efficient following rules that werent meant for discussions and not debates. Also, what reasons do you have for not having a debate board besides it already being shared with Serious Discussion?

It makes the site look bad when we have inactive or duplicate sections. If the serious discussion section is dead, there's no reason to turn one inactive section into two. It's just unnecessary.

 

These are the only extra rules for the serious discussion section:

 

Use proper grammar

Post with more than one sentence

Do not flame or insult other members

Nothing here would stop some one from having a serious debate.

 

It is not the fact of having too many rules. It is the fact that it is lacking rules. Debates need to have very strict and enforced rules and formats. Also, it is not my main intentions to split fully revive Serious Discussions. I intend to have a section on the board where we can actually have healthy debates, and show off our website's maturity of members wile still being serious.

But we CAN and HAVE had those exact same type of debates within the serious discussion section.

 

Yes, but look at most of the threads in Serious Discussion. They are either about people's personal life, or questions people have to ask. The Serious Discussion forum is NOT dead. The debates that we used to have are. Having a section dedicated solely to debates would be more organized and more efficient.

[Poply 178]

Ok how about the topic that I opened up in my other thread:

NamelessOne666 is a faggot. How can you debate that topic WITHOUT flaming? It's nearly impossible to do so. And what Rob said

 

I realize what you mean by using some flaming when necessary. However, not to cause confusion, flaming the other person during a debate is never acceptable, however flaming the idea and providing proof you one's flame is acceptable.

 

ex.

Bad - You are retarded.

Good - The idea of not having a sub board is retarded because having debates withing Serious Discussion is too condensed.

You can't debate about something like that. It's not serious topic unless you're genuinely trying to figure out his sexual orientation then you could definitely go through without ever once flaming. It's the same reason why you can't have a serious discussion topic about how you think Elvis is alive and ruling the universe from his intergalactic spaceship.

[Azqato 503]

Ok how about the topic that I opened up in my other thread:

NamelessOne666 is a faggot. How can you debate that topic WITHOUT flaming? It's nearly impossible to do so. And what Rob said

 

I realize what you mean by using some flaming when necessary. However, not to cause confusion, flaming the other person during a debate is never acceptable, however flaming the idea and providing proof you one's flame is acceptable.

 

ex.

Bad - You are retarded.

Good - The idea of not having a sub board is retarded because having debates withing Serious Discussion is too condensed.

You can't debate about something like that. It's not serious topic unless you're genuinely trying to figure out his sexual orientation then you could definitely go through without ever once flaming. It's the same reason why you can't have a serious discussion topic about how you think Elvis is alive and ruling the universe from his intergalactic spaceship.

 

I agree with you on the fact that Nameless's "debate" was rather stupid.

 

However you can debate it by saying,

He is a faggot, he has sex with guys. [shows pics]

No he is not, he has a girlfriend [shows myspace status]

 

As long as you back up what you are saying, you can really debate anything.

[Poply 178]

We really don't need anymore inactive dead boards. If we want a section revived, then we should start posting in it. We don't need to add anything.

 

Again, it doesn't seem fit to have debates in a section in which one is supposed to be discussing. If worst comes to worst and it becomes highly inactive (not that probable because there are lot of topics to debate), we could just delete the sub board and forget it ever happened.

You're arguing semantics. Feel free to have debates in the serious discussion section like we've been doing all these years.

 

I realize that we have been doing it in Serious Discussion, but it just is not efficient following rules that werent meant for discussions and not debates. Also, what reasons do you have for not having a debate board besides it already being shared with Serious Discussion?

It makes the site look bad when we have inactive or duplicate sections. If the serious discussion section is dead, there's no reason to turn one inactive section into two. It's just unnecessary.

 

These are the only extra rules for the serious discussion section:

 

Use proper grammar

Post with more than one sentence

Do not flame or insult other members

Nothing here would stop some one from having a serious debate.

 

It is not the fact of having too many rules. It is the fact that it is lacking rules. Debates need to have very strict and enforced rules and formats. Also, it is not my main intentions to split fully revive Serious Discussions. I intend to have a section on the board where we can actually have healthy debates, and show off our website's maturity of members wile still being serious.

But we CAN and HAVE had those exact same type of debates within the serious discussion section.

 

Yes, but look at most of the threads in Serious Discussion. They are either about people's personal life, or questions people have to ask. Having a section dedicated solely to debates would be more organized and more efficient.

Now you're argument is about the content being created in the serious discussion section. Which the reason those topic aren't about debates is simply because people chose to not make topics about debating something not because the serious discussion section wasn't an appropriate section for it.

[NamelessOne666 55]

Ok how about the topic that I opened up in my other thread:

NamelessOne666 is a faggot. How can you debate that topic WITHOUT flaming? It's nearly impossible to do so. And what Rob said

 

I realize what you mean by using some flaming when necessary. However, not to cause confusion, flaming the other person during a debate is never acceptable, however flaming the idea and providing proof you one's flame is acceptable.

 

ex.

Bad - You are retarded.

Good - The idea of not having a sub board is retarded because having debates withing Serious Discussion is too condensed.

You can't debate about something like that. It's not serious topic unless you're genuinely trying to figure out his sexual orientation then you could definitely go through without ever once flaming. It's the same reason why you can't have a serious discussion topic about how you think Elvis is alive and ruling the universe from his intergalactic spaceship.

 

I beg to differ. You can have a debate on ANYTHING, even that. Some things do seems rather stupid BUT you have enough PROOF that they do exist, you can debate them, so this topic CAN be debated if provided with correct sources.

[Poply 178]

Ok how about the topic that I opened up in my other thread:

NamelessOne666 is a faggot. How can you debate that topic WITHOUT flaming? It's nearly impossible to do so. And what Rob said

 

I realize what you mean by using some flaming when necessary. However, not to cause confusion, flaming the other person during a debate is never acceptable, however flaming the idea and providing proof you one's flame is acceptable.

 

ex.

Bad - You are retarded.

Good - The idea of not having a sub board is retarded because having debates withing Serious Discussion is too condensed.

You can't debate about something like that. It's not serious topic unless you're genuinely trying to figure out his sexual orientation then you could definitely go through without ever once flaming. It's the same reason why you can't have a serious discussion topic about how you think Elvis is alive and ruling the universe from his intergalactic spaceship.

 

I agree with you on the fact that Nameless's "debate" was rather stupid.

 

However you can debate it by saying,

He is a faggot, he has sex with guys. [shows pics]

No he is not, he has a girlfriend [shows myspace status]

 

As long as you back up what you are saying, you can really debate anything.

Then he can feel free to make a serious discussion asking what others think about his sexual preferences.

 

If people disagree, they can feel free to debate about it (whether or not it is encouraged by the topic creator or the rules of the board) just as how within a debate section people can opt out of ever even posting.